I have the Overlord pack and 2 copies of the base game. I like Overlord but some of my friends can take or leave it, especially with less than 6 players.

Has anyone played an Overlord scenario, with 2p v 2p just using standard rules? Each team plays either the left or right side of the board - essentially you have one board each and play against your opponent as normal.

I mostly play overlord format 1v1 and that is my favourite way of playing simply because it is easiest to play and arrange. I also play a lot of 1v1 using vassal pbem. I never play single board scenarios any more, but I love the battle maps and the large number of overlord format scenarios on the vassal module.

I have played 3v3 several times including rwice on vassal using live play and had a blast, but it's difficult to organise. But I've also played 1v2. 2v2 and 2v3 with battle maps F2F. It's all good.

I have the Breakthrough expansion but don't really use it as I much Prefer Overlord format play. I can't see any reason why standard rules wouldn't work on an overlord format map, but to my taste Overlord rules are so much better that I wouldn't want to. But we all likes what we likes, so go for it. I do think that the larger hand size does make sense on the larger battle area though, unless you were giving each field general their own deck of cards. If so I would scale their hand sizes from the overlord scenario hand size.

I was also fortunate to play a 3v3 game at a convention, using the D-Day OverThrough maps of Gold, Sword and Juno beaches. That needed a BIG table and was huge fun.

One other thing, if you are using the Op Overlord deck of cards, the rules say to shuffle both decks into a common deck. I highly recommend that you do not. Give each side an identical deck. Otherwise it is possible that one side draws the majority of the powerful cards which can really skew a game.

To my knowledge what you are suggesting is a new way to play overlord. Each player has their own half of the board and full control of the decisions in that sphere. I am assuming that each player would also have his own cards and that you would play with (2) standard decks and each board pair [Axis & Allie] sharing a deck for their board. I don't see any reason that it would not be fun, but you will have some interesting skirmishes at the border (where the two boards adjoin).

I would think that you could alternate play on opposite corners. So ALLIES Left would start, followed by AXIS Left. Then ALLIED Right followed by AXIS Right. Or the ALLIES, would go first playing from L-> R etc. Or the possibility exists for one side to coordinate their attack and play somewhat simultaneously with some alternating in battles. There will still be waiting. Not to say there isn't enough waiting around already in the Standard Overlord.

So I played Omaha Beach Overlord at the weekend. 4 players, 2v2 on each side of the board. From a mechanical viewpoint it worked perfectly. There were no issues that caused any problems.

The scenario itself was pretty bad though. The Axis won easily (8-2), as the Allies were slaughtered on the beaches and I (as Axis left side) never once felt threatened. The very low medal count win makes this a doozy for the Axis.

I think next time I would allow some card swapping between left and right general, say 1 or 2 card swaps. I just took the usual starting hand size (8) and split it to 4 cards each, all from a single deck to ensure no Tactic card duplicates. Worked fine but there was near zero interaction with my teammate.